Yak-3 or Yak-9 or... something able to have a chance dogfighting vs the LW ?

July 1, 2016

Which is very, very slim, and not as one-sided as you put it. Honestly, a few weeks ago I was carelessly fighting two C.202s, one Bf-110 and two Bf-109F in the LaGG-3 alone and it was a turkey shoot for me. I could roll out of every attack, and whenever I was done shooting I revved up the engine and did a spiral climb to reposition. I damaged the Bf-110, brought down the Bf-109F and landed peacefully.

During that fight another Bf-109F decided to play cosmonaut with me and went up to 6000m while I sat at 3000m, but at the speeds he was in any sudden change of direction and I defeated his shot.

Honestly, 2 extra m/s of climb rate or another 20 km/h won't save the day or change the game around.

1) That's just your opinion. Let's just agree to disagree

2) It's more than 20km/h or 2m/s

3) If you're happy with the planeset, good for you, yet if I want to agree with the OP that it'd be good to have a more even planeset, that's my right.

July 1, 2016

From what i have seen this week on WOL the LW aircraft are easier to bring down . A few hits and its over .

You may want to spend more then a week on that.. but yeah, some russian aircraft are modeled very very durable from certain angles, like the Lagg or the Pe2.. but shot in the right place, they are still a one-shot kill, too. Like every other plane.

Or simply take a 190, all durability means nothing when you bring the wing cannons and explosive shells... really.

Some of the LW aircraft also have durability, the 190 is incredibly sturdy agains frontal attacks (it´s a head-on killing machine) and the Ju-88 is fairly good armored against rear attacks and with it´s speed relatively safe from frontal attacks.

Flying both sides, I can´t really say the game is unbalanced.. yes the Luftwaffe has the overall better planes like it historically was, but some of the russian planes are modeled very very positive and there is little point in complaining. Additionally, the variety of russian planes works well in teamwork, so if the russian players comunicate and fly different planes purposefully, they can get additional benefits.

Edited July 1, 2016 by Dr_Zeebra

July 1, 2016

I find the Ju-88 has a pretty curious arrangement.

Looking at the image below, nearly all of the aircraft is free of vital components so when firing from a level position anywhere behind the 3-9 line can only bring it down through structural damage or disabling the controls. However, there is that 4m x 4m area between the engines where all fuel tanks, the engines and most importantly the crew is housed. A good burst of machine gun fire does some crippling damage there, and a hail of HE shells even more so. The silver lining is that one can only regularly hit that area by firing from the front quarter or from above. With the Ju-88's speed, it has a chance of keeping a closure rate small enough to spare itself the grim fate, but once the enemy takes a shot there it feels like game over.

It's interesting that a lot of Soviet units were flying the Yak-1 all the way to 1944, and even more kept their La-5 into 1944 and 1945, including Ivan Kozhedub (64 victories) and Kirill Yevstigneyev (56 victories) from 240 IAP who only traded in the five-tank La-5 in spring 1944, receiving the La-5F instead. If they go with Eastern Front 1943, particularly Kuban, the German side will get the heavier Bf-109G-6 and the improved Fw-190A-5 while we will be riding Airacobras from 1941 or 1942 at best coupled with either 1941 Spitfires, 1942/3 LaGG-3s, Yak-1s or La-5s.

Factually speaking once we got past the I-16 type 5 vs. Bf-109F mess in June 1941 there was never a performance difference which could not be offset by tactics. Even down the line in 1945 in terms of maximum performance (a very, very difference concept from actual combat performance and employment) the La-7 and Yak-3 were still the same 20 km/h or more behind the Fw-190D-9 and Bf-109K-4, with the Yak-9U having relative parity at medium altitudes.

And you know what that meant? Nothing, of course! The Luftwaffe was still overwhelmed numerically and tactically, and despite having faster planes that would win the Red Bull Air Race 1945 tour, they got their arses handed to them big time. When someone really, really good showed up at the wheel however, things still went sour - there is a famous story of four La-7s of 9 GIAP, the famed 'Regiment of Aces', which engaged some Fw-190s. After a while things were still going badly and they called for support. Another six La-7s showed up, making 10. The fight went on for minutes, nobody scored a hit, and in the end everyone went home. Maslennikov landed, visibly frustrated and pissed off, so Lavrinenkov who wasn't in the mission asked how many Fw-190s were there.

"...just two."

There is good reason nearly every single pilot liked the lend-lease aircraft in 1941-1942 and all the aircraft flown from 1943 onwards - the radio made it easy to run tactics.

July 1, 2016

It's interesting that a lot of Soviet units were flying the Yak-1 all the way to 1944, and even more kept their La-5 into 1944 and 1945, including Ivan Kozhedub (64 victories) and Kirill Yevstigneyev (56 victories) from 240 IAP who only traded in the five-tank La-5 in spring 1944, receiving the La-5F instead. If they go with Eastern Front 1943, particularly Kuban, the German side will get the heavier Bf-109G-6 and the improved Fw-190A-5 while we will be riding Airacobras from 1941 or 1942 at best coupled with either 1941 Spitfires, 1942/3 LaGG-3s, Yak-1s or La-5s.

Factually speaking once we got past the I-16 type 5 vs. Bf-109F mess in June 1941 there was never a performance difference which could not be offset by tactics. Even down the line in 1945 in terms of maximum performance (a very, very difference concept from actual combat performance and employment) the La-7 and Yak-3 were still the same 20 km/h or more behind the Fw-190D-9 and Bf-109K-4, with the Yak-9U having relative parity at medium altitudes.

Russian aircrafts progressed in many ways. German planes were the fastest till the end but the gap narrowed quite significantly reg. combat performance. Yak 1 vs 109 F4 is quite more one sided that Yak 3 Vs 109 K4 .

I don't want to be reading books about what could be done or what has been done. I prefer flying than theory crafting.

It'd be great if we were given planes with a smaller performance gap. That's all there is to it.It's so simple, I don't really understand why people have to derail it. The point of this thread is to mention that wish for a smaller perf gap. Not to collect lectures.

If you want to create a flying school, please create your own thread.

Edited July 1, 2016 by Turban

July 1, 2016

You may want to spend more then a week on that.. but yeah, some russian aircraft are modeled very very durable from certain angles, like the Lagg or the Pe2.. but shot in the right place, they are still a one-shot kill, too. Like every other plane.

Or simply take a 190, all durability means nothing when you bring the wing cannons and explosive shells... really.

Some of the LW aircraft also have durability, the 190 is incredibly sturdy agains frontal attacks (it´s a head-on killing machine) and the Ju-88 is fairly good armored against rear attacks and with it´s speed relatively safe from frontal attacks.

Flying both sides, I can´t really say the game is unbalanced.. yes the Luftwaffe has the overall better planes like it historically was, but some of the russian planes are modeled very very positive and there is little point in complaining. Additionally, the variety of russian planes works well in teamwork, so if the russian players comunicate and fly different planes purposefully, they can get additional benefits.

ON that note i am flying VVs this month .

July 1, 2016

It'd be great if we were given planes with a smaller performance gap. That's all there is to it.It's so simple, I don't really understand why people have to derail it. The point of this thread is to mention that wish for a smaller perf gap. Not to collect lectures.

Turban I read your frustration but don't understand what it is your after. I'm assuming you do want historical correctness in the FM's and dont want to sacrifice that in favor of performance balancing red/blue planesets.

So what you want is to bring in planes that did not fly (in any kind of significant numbers) on the eastern front during BoS or BoM, but can match 109 performance? Or your simply after the devs choosing the next theater to be one where allies/axis aircraft had comparable performance?

July 1, 2016

Turban I read your frustration but don't understand what it is your after. I'm assuming you do want historical correctness in the FM's and dont want to sacrifice that in favor of performance balancing red/blue planesets.

So what you want is to bring in planes that did not fly (in any kind of significant numbers) on the eastern front during BoS or BoM, but can match 109 performance? Or your simply after the devs choosing the next theater to be one where allies/axis aircraft had comparable performance?

Short answer is yes, it's about the next theater being more even

Definitely want historical correctness and FMs and no artificial balancing.

Some Yaks could have been implemented into BoS without breaking the historical correctness and make the life of the russian fighter a litle bit (not change the game) more confortable but at this point I don't think that'll happen so I'll just be happy if the next theater brings that "more even" playing field.

July 1, 2016

That's an interesting thought. I don't know which theater of war had very balanced aircraft, In regards to performance only, not quantity of individual aircraft types, tactics, pilot experience or any other conditions. Perhaps Mitsubishi A5m vs I-16, second sino-japanese war? I'd like that Then throw some Hawk 3's and p-26 peashooters and whatever else that was there, in there just for the fun of it.

Edited July 1, 2016 by aa_radek

July 1, 2016

A6m5 rather.

Best pacific matchup in 46 was the ki61 kia vs F6F hellcat.

July 1, 2016

Other great matchups.

A6m2 vs wildcat

P39 vs A6m3

A6m5 vs early hellcat

Ki 84 vs p51

The corsair was just a blast to fly. Altime favorite badass looking plane of the war.

July 1, 2016

Wow, I can just keep going. Lol

P47 vs Ki61 and you could sub the P38 too.

The Val was a fun bomber to dogfight in. Kind of like the Il2 with the dogfighting skills.

What about the Ki 43 vs p 40 or hurricane.

P400 vs A6m3 was tit for tat

Wow so many excellent matchups.

Too bad we are stuck with laggs vs 109s. Lol

July 1, 2016

A6m5 rather.

I really did mean A5m, it was not a spelling error

Sounds like fun battles your listing Snake9. I don't know much about performance numbers, but if 109f4 vs yak-1 is to unneven for some, A6m2 vs wildcat for instance I suspect would be even worse.

July 1, 2016

I really did mean A5m, it was not a spelling error

Sounds like fun battles your listing Snake9. I don't know much about performance numbers, but if 109f4 vs yak-1 is to unneven for some, A6m2 vs wildcat for instance I suspect would be even worse.

Well. I know it sounds crazy but... I'd still buy that. If they release that, I'll buy it. And I promise I won't complain

Just because BoS/BoM is such a great sim overall. In the end what matters is the love for the planes. And I love the Wildcat. So I'd get it.

And I'm not sure the Wildcat was totally without advantages. It would dive much faster, was much more resistant, and had 6 (6!) .50 cal machine guns. (Russian aircrafts have 1 or 2.50 cals.) Obviously the A6M2 was a superior aircraft in most ways.

So I would buy that, although as much as I love the Wildcat, I guess it'd make more sense to do a slightly later theater. Most theaters in 43/44/45 had good example of relatively even planesets.

The early eastern front is known for being quite an unbalanced front. So I don't think it can get worse anyway

July 1, 2016

A6m2 vs wildcat was such a good tatical matchup it bought about one of the most popular servers of its time.

Zeke vs Wildcat

Much like its brother server Spits vs 109.

I have never seen a major server called Lagg vs 109. Lol

July 1, 2016

I really enjoyed it when an F6F came in alone against me in a Ki-61. Not thant it always went my way, but it was always a good fight, and so many Hellcat drivers were so overconfident. I really liked to fight those guys...

July 1, 2016

This might sound hurtful or patronising, but it's what opened my eyes in terms of air combat:

Every single defeat in an aerial combat is the pilot's fault, this is a fact of life.

Improvement comes from recognising these mistakes, rectifying them and looking out for ways to improve.

If you blame your aircraft for your defeats, you are setting yourself up for more defeats because if you do not observe what you did wrong, you will never be able to act on it.

The biggest weapon you have at hand is the human reaction time and predictability - if you move and he reacts, you dictate the engagement and not the other way around so keep that in mind. Also, if you make it look like you are going down but then you go up for example, the enemy is toast. You get the idea. Going up is actually wise because you need altitude anyway, and when the enemy expects you to fight on the horizontal they may get a little lost for a while.

Four free materials that helped me immensely:

Short read, four pages: A Soviet Air Forces tactical manual from 1943, uploaded by good old Ilya "Luthier" Shevchenko. Applies to all Soviet aircraft, against all German aircraft. Read this over and over again, it will change it around for you. http://luthier.stormloader.com/SFTacticsI.htm

Long read: In Pursuit, by Johan Kylander, probably the best knowledge per page ratio you can find in a book about virtual air combat, easy to understand and apply, and aimed specifically at WW2 aircraft. I've reread this about three times over the years, and I keep referring to it every now and then to keep myself up to speed. http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/lento_ohjeet/inpursuit/inpursuit.pdf

A video, 50 minutes: Aleksandr Pokryshkin, 1985, interviews with the man himself and other 16 GIAP aces. There is a lot of talk on tactics, on the mentality of the fighter pilot and good discussions on how to dominate an engagement from the get-go. Pay close attention to his merge technique of zooming up and rolling down on the enemy, it will send those 109s and 190s in a fit.

Self-practice: Free, easy and fun. Every time you shoot someone down or get shot down, get a piece of paper (a notebook works best because you can keep it together), and sketch up the final manoeuvres of the engagement and the two moves that preceded that. Note what did you go wrong, and what the enemy did wrong. Write down right below the drawing (rudimentary works, I'll post a pic here later) what was it. "Too little speed", "turned the wrong way", "didn't turn tight enough", "didn't use the vertical enough" and so on.

Wow! I am thinking about getting IL2 Moscow, whenever it goes on sale. I was kind of worried about the fact that I have been out of IL2 for an extremely long time. I need to relearn how to do this IL2 prop plane stuff. I am really keen on getting into the I-16 and the Mig-3. You just have me a really good head start on getting up to speed. Thank you very much, Sir! MJ

Edited July 1, 2016 by =69.GIAP=MIKHA

July 1, 2016

A6m2 and F4F-3 are virtually identical in level speed. The F4F can out dive the A6m and the A6m can out climb the F4F. Armament weight is similar but the F4F has considerably more armor. It's a fight that comes down to tactics and pilot skill, as it should be. It was true during the war as well. When the Americans stopped trying to stall fight they fared much better than in their early combat attempts with the nimble Zero fighter.

July 1, 2016

I really enjoyed it when an F6F came in alone against me in a Ki-61. Not thant it always went my way, but it was always a good fight, and so many Hellcat drivers were so overconfident. I really liked to fight those guys...

I killed so many Hellcats

The point of this thread is to mention that wish for a smaller perf gap.

We should look into how the different air forces were evened out during the real war and seek to emulate that process.

I'm sure measures were taken by all sides to make sure the playing field was even and that no particular plane had a performance

advantage over another.

Go ahead and investigate that for us and report back.

July 2, 2016

We should look into how the different air forces were evened out during the real war and seek to emulate that process.

I'm sure measures were taken by all sides to make sure the playing field was even and that no particular plane had a performance

advantage over another.

Well, I see that you try to be as sarcastic as possible. I don't really see the need for that. But I guess you're just trying to start a flame war.

But it won't work.

Yes, armies all over the world always tried to even things out. When they were outmatched, they would do their very best to try to bring their plane closer to their enemies or make it better.

When they'd come out with an improved plane the playing field was indeed more even.

Till the next best thing came in.

Those moments when one army caught up to an others are the ones that would make a good even playing field.

So yeah, you tried to be sarcastic and all, but in the end you should have thought about it for a second, because you ask for something rather obvious in such a disdainful way that it sheds a rather gloomy light on you..

Edited July 2, 2016 by Turban

July 2, 2016

Wow! I am thinking about getting IL2 Moscow, whenever it goes on sale. I was kind of worried about the fact that I have been out of IL2 for an extremely long time. I need to relearn how to do this IL2 prop plane stuff. I am really keen on getting into the I-16 and the Mig-3. You just have me a really good head start on getting up to speed. Thank you very much, Sir! MJ

I will think about it at 50% off.

You will be opening a whole new can of worms with this game.

There is a lot of gloomy light in this forum recently.

hehehe.

Yay sayers and nay sayers are going at it in every thread.

I just want everything at 50%.

July 2, 2016

Well, I see that you try to be as sarcastic as possible. I don't really see the need for that. But I guess you're just trying to start a flame war.

But it won't work.

Yes, armies all over the world always tried to even things out. When they were outmatched, they would do their very best to try to bring their plane closer to their enemies or make it better.

When they'd come out with an improved plane the playing field was indeed more even.

Till the next best thing came in.

Those moments when one army caught up to an others are the ones that would make a good even playing field.

So yeah, you tried to be sarcastic and all, but in the end you should have thought about it for a second, because you ask for something rather obvious in such a disdainful way that it sheds a rather gloomy light on you..

With respect you're not gong to find much empathy for your "game play over realism" philosophy around here.

You might be happier with Star Citizen.

What most of us want is an as accurate as possible portrayal of the air conflict between Russia and Germany during this part of the war - period.

Whatever that entails. Same goes for any theater that follows.

The "evening of the playing field" as you describe in your fantasy world didn't always happen, an certainly didn't happen within every little period of the war.

Things didn't "even out" during Stalingrad, then go askew, then "even out" again during the Battle of Moscow, etc.

Things started off fairly even between the US and Japan early on/1942, but the US hardware steadily got better and the Japanese hardware

more or less stagnated. Though there were small changes, the Zero was basically the same plane in 1945 that it was in 1942.

Other aircraft like the Ki 61 were not reliable, nor were they produced in great enough numbers to make a difference.

Japan, as much as I love the Zeke, lost the hardware race. Things did not "even out"

Germany was set to trounce Allied air forces had better decisions been made on their end in certain other areas.

Hardware certainly wasn't their problem - it was top drawer.

So much for things "evening out" in the real world.

You know what I find works well for this sort of thing?

Books.

...and yes we know you have the "right" want what you want, and others have the right to try and educate or enlighten you as well.

Edited July 2, 2016 by Gambit21

July 2, 2016

With respect you're not gong to find much empathy for your "game play over realism" philosophy around here.

You might be happier with Star Citizen.

What most of us want is an as accurate as possible portrayal of the air conflict between Russia and Germany during this part of the war - period.

Whatever that entails. Same goes for any theater that follows.

The "evening of the playing field" as you describe in your fantasy world didn't always happen, an certainly didn't happen within every little period of the war.

Things didn't "even out" during Stalingrad, then go askew, then "even out" again during the Battle of Moscow, etc.

Things started off fairly even between the US and Japan early on/1942, but the US hardware steadily got better and the Japanese hardware

more or less stagnated. Though there were small changes, the Zero was basically the same plane in 1945 that it was in 1942.

Other aircraft like the Ki 61 were not reliable, were enough or produced in great enough numbers to make a difference.

Japan, as much as I love the Zeke, lost the hardware race. Things did not "even out"

Germany was set to trounce Allied air forces had better decisions been made on their end in certain other areas.

Hardware certainly wasn't their problem - it was top drawer.

So much for things "evening out" in the real world.

You know what I find works well for this sort of thing?

Books.

...and yes we know you have the "right" want what you want, and others have the right to try and educate or enlighten you as well.

So you realised you made no sense and had to make a wall of text to justify it, with convoluted and vague generalities, while trying to distort what I have been saying.

And that conclusion ... so much arrogance, yet you're just digging deeper.

Sorry it just won't work.

Why do you even talk about Star Citizen ? Smoke screen ?

Edited July 2, 2016 by Turban

July 2, 2016

July 2, 2016

Turban, the man bothered to give you a vast list of actual reasons why requesting a specific balance is not feasible. This isn't The Turban Show, you don't get to pick what's a valid argument.

If you want to fight in even terms at all levels, join 1 x 1 tournaments where you both fly the same aircraft. Most people who buy these games want to see and experience the challenges faced by each air force while having fun with it. It isn't all roses for the German side though: taking Battle of Stalingrad as an example, sure, the Bf-109 has the choice to fight or flight against the Yak-1 and LaGG-3. Meanwhile, the Ju-87 and He-111 are slow pieces of junk from the sunny days of 1935, performing terribly at anything but bomb load. On the other side you have the Pe-2, a fast, durable and deadly machine that can do anything from level bombing to mixing up with fighters if the need arises, and the Il-2, an armoured killer where you can fly through hell and fire while being confident of a safe return.

In a mission context, what difference does it make if I can level out and run away when the enemy will steamroll past all my defences, destroy my tanks and blow my airfield to bits while I'm at it? The Bf-109 might be an ace-maker but it doesn't win wars, and that is why the Bf-109 and the slight performance edge it has does not break gameplay or make things uninteresting.

July 2, 2016

A6m2 vs wildcat was such a good tatical matchup it bought about one of the most popular servers of its time.

Zeke vs Wildcat

Much like its brother server Spits vs 109.

I have never seen a major server called Lagg vs 109. Lol

Yep

Fly each aircraft to it's strengths and you can be successful in either - fairly analogous to our current simulation here.

I killed many Wildcats, but killed my share of Zekes too when flying the F4 - just had to climb high, make one high speed pass and dive for home.

Or extend WAY out, climb and come back looking for more only when I'd grabbed plenty of altitude.

Pretty much like in real life.

When I'm "in shape" flying a lot I do fine in the Yak against 109's.

I don't get that kind of stick time lately though, right now I'd get spanked.

...and I've not flown against an F4 yet.

Edited July 2, 2016 by Gambit21

July 2, 2016

and the Il-2, an armoured killer where you can fly through hell and fire while being confident of a safe return.

Which reminds me - flying the Il2, delivering some ordinance and returning to base is about the most rewarding thing I've done in this game.

Close second is the He 111, but I'm not very good with that bomb site thingy yet.

July 2, 2016

Wow! I am thinking about getting IL2 Moscow, whenever it goes on sale. I was kind of worried about the fact that I have been out of IL2 for an extremely long time. I need to relearn how to do this IL2 prop plane stuff. I am really keen on getting into the I-16 and the Mig-3. You just have me a really good head start on getting up to speed. Thank you very much, Sir! MJ

Glad to be of service! I had to relearn all that after being out of the loop for some 5 years spent either not simming or on DCS so I had to do it the hard way The I-16 is a ridiculously capable fighter once you learn to fly it (very, very twitchy, but it flies like a hummingbird), and the MiG-3 is great if you keep your speed, across all altitudes.

July 2, 2016

you don't get to pick what's a valid argument.

But you and him do ?

This isn't The Turban Show

Funny , coming from someone who post in pretty much every single thread claiming to have superior knowledge and experience about pretty much everything.

the man bothered to give you a vast list of actual reasons why requesting a specific balance is not feasible.

It seems people are oblivious to the point of this thread.

1) Was the earlly eastern front known for the wide performance gap between fighters on both side ? Yes/No.

2) Was it the case on all fronts at all time ? Yes/No.

Answers : 1) Yes ; 2)No

Conclusion : There were times and places where both sides would line up with rather balanced fighters . Would be great it the next theater was one of those time and place.

I don't see how hard it can be to get.

I don't see the benefit to argue against having a theater where one side's fighters wouldn't completely outclass the other side's.

Arguing for the sake of arguing?

Edited July 2, 2016 by Turban

July 2, 2016

With regard to your conclusion - that's one of the best reasons for Pacific, Guadalcanal 1942.

The same might be true of other theaters in the East but the depth of my knowledge there doesn't run so deep.

July 2, 2016

Oh and as things more into later war, regardless of the front, things get less interesting for me.

There is something visceral, a sort of "wind in the hair" feeling about flying a Mig 3 or a 109E, and more literally with the I16.

As things get faster and more sophisticated, I'm still having fun...just not as much.

Early war was always more fun in the old sim too (IMHO)

I'm not crazy about the prospect of a G6 vs La7 scenario or similar, even though they're perhaps more evenly matched.

I like facing an enemy while flying an inferior aircraft and coming out on top - it's much more rewarding.

...and if I die I have a good excuse.

July 2, 2016

Turban, I am not dismissing you as a nonsense spewing lunatic, but simply commenting on your comments which is what a forum for discussions is for, is it not? My status as a loudmouth has nothing to do with this, and is only a problem for whomever is on TeamSpeak with me during a 400km round trip when I'll start talking about 'that one time when...' but that's a different thing

Your conclusion is also overly simplified because while the Eastern Front is 'known' (to whom?) for being asymmetrical in 1941/1942, this is mostly poor historical writing mixed with armchair generalship. The major factor hampering the Soviet Air Forces in 1941/1942 was the lack of widespread modern tactical and strategic doctrine, which only changed when Aleksandr Novikov took control of the Army Air Forces.

So back to the disasters of 1941/1942, factually the problem was: without good tactics you can't use your aircraft's capabilities, and without good radios you can't apply good tactics. Units which reworked their tactics and/or gained access to two-way radios obtained good results during that period. The MiG-3, Yak-1 and LaGG-3 were modern aircraft which could compete in even terms with the Bf-109E and Bf-109F, even if at a slight disadvantage.

Here is the combat record of Vadim Fadeev, 16 GIAP, flying exclusively the P-39D-2 deep into 1943: 16 aerial victories within 24 days. Of these 16, 15 victims were Bf-109s and one was a Ju-87. On the technical side of things, there is no imbalance. The Bf-109G-2s he fought might have climbed better and were faster, but the P-39 manoeuvred well and above all had good firepower. Asymmetrical balance is much more interesting than the eternal pissing contest of 5 extra or less km/h.

July 2, 2016

I will think about it at 50% off.

You will be opening a whole new can of worms with this game.

There is a lot of gloomy light in this forum recently.

hehehe.

Yay sayers and nay sayers are going at it in every thread.

I just want everything at 50%.

seriously ? what are you on about

Cheers Dakpilot

July 2, 2016

seriously ? what are you on about

Cheers Dakpilot

Game is too expensive is that clear enough?.

Not the only one thinking it but I will say it.

Which reminds me - flying the Il2, delivering some ordinance and returning to base is about the most rewarding thing I've done in this game.

Close second is the He 111, but I'm not very good with that bomb site thingy yet.

I like dropping bombs in the HE-111 at 5000m it is fun.

Edited July 2, 2016 by WTornado

July 2, 2016

I agree with all of this, but I'd still love to have a Yak-1b or La-5F just for the better rearward visibility! Apart from the MiG-3 and I-16, the Soviet fleet really suffers in that regard IMO.

(Imagine how beautiful a bubble-top LaGG would have been )

Well, I don`t think the German planes are any better in that regard. Try to look behind from Bf-109

July 2, 2016

I agree with all of this, but I'd still love to have a Yak-1b or La-5F just for the better rearward visibility! Apart from the MiG-3 and I-16, the Soviet fleet really suffers in that regard IMO.

(Imagine how beautiful a bubble-top LaGG would have been )

Its not too hard to imagine

Yak-1B is Stalingrad appropriate but the La-5F comes a few months later.

Still hoping to see both of those at some point.

July 2, 2016

When did the p-39 enter then? Anyone? And what version(s) were there first? Brittish p-400 20mm?

July 2, 2016

Actually the Kuban will bring some better, but not absolute, parity between the VVS and Luftwaffe.

The Yak 9, 1B, and P39 will be a great help in this regard. Were La5Fs, there as well?

Edited July 2, 2016 by BlitzPig_EL

July 2, 2016

The very first Soviet P-39s were Airacobra Mk.Ia delivered by the UK.

In combat they were first used on the 15th May 1942, by 145 IAP (19 GIAP) in the Murmansk area. 153 IAP (28 GIAP, Voronezh) and 185 IAP (Leningrad) were sent to the front with their Airacobras in the 29th and 30th of June 1942, while 180 IAP (30 GIAP, Central Front) first fought with its Airacobras in August 1942.

After this initial batch, further Airacobra deliveries were made through Iran and the ALSIB route, and units equipped with the P-39D-2, P-39K-1 and P-39L-1 were sent from 25 ZAP to the front in the Kuban area, the first of which was 45 IAP (100 GIAP) in March.

A good read on the subject:

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/romanenko/p-39/

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/romanenko/p-39/part2.htm

El, I tried to find it but I can't see anything which indicates the presence of La-5Fs in the Kuban area during Spring at least. Some units flew the five-tank La-5 from the end of 1942 until the beginning of 1943, but these were transferred elsewhere after that. The Yak-1 with bubble top canopy was present closer to summer, and I can't find much about the early Yak-9 there either. Most units were flying Yak-1, LaGG-3 and P-39, with the Spitfire being somewhat common for a month, 9 P-40Es from March to April and 11 P-40K that lasted through summer.

July 2, 2016

Actually the Kuban will bring some better, but not absolute, parity between the VVS and Luftwaffe.

The Yak 9, 1B, and P39 will be a great help in this regard. Were La5Fs, there as well?

Spring 1943

I always liked the idea of mixed regiments the VVS had mid-war.

216th SAD comprised five regiments 16th GIAP and the, 45th IAP(P-39K-1), 42nd IAP,57th GIAP(Spitfire MKVb), and 765th ShAP.

You also had the 821st IAP flying Spitfire MK Vb.

I think they had the LA-5F (supercharged) for Kuban offensive..

Spits,Spits,Spits always mention the Spits.

You also had the 821st IAP flying Spitfire MK Vb.

July 3, 2016

With Kuban if they threw in a Spitfire and A-20/Il-4 would have so many aircraft families on the Allied side, and all of which were there.

I-16

MiG-3

P-40E

LaGG-3

Yak-1

La-5

P-39

Spitfire

Pe-2

Il-2

A-20/Il-4

These would be up against:

Bf-109

C.202

Fw-190

IAR 81

Bf-110

Ju-88

Ju-87

He-111

Hooray for variety

Yak-3 or Yak-9 or... something able to have a chance dogfighting vs the LW ?

Recommended Posts

Turban

Monostripezebra

216th_Lucas_From_Hell

Turban

KoN_

A_radek

Turban

A_radek

VBF-12_Snake9

VBF-12_Snake9

VBF-12_Snake9

A_radek

Turban

VBF-12_Snake9

BlitzPig_EL

Volkoff

II/JG17_HerrMurf

Gambit21

Turban

wtornado

Gambit21

Turban

Gambit21

216th_Lucas_From_Hell

Gambit21

Gambit21

216th_Lucas_From_Hell

Turban

Gambit21

Gambit21

216th_Lucas_From_Hell

Dakpilot

wtornado

LLv24_Zami

ShamrockOneFive

A_radek

BlitzPig_EL

216th_Lucas_From_Hell

wtornado

216th_Lucas_From_Hell

Please sign in to comment

Browse All

Activity